Three Important Considerations for Studies Examining Pathophysiological Pathways in Psychiatric Illness

Phillips, Mary L.; Kendler, Kenneth S.

doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.0022

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 5 publications

(7 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, self-reported MDD, any anxiety, and GAD in this study had high agreement with symptom-based diagnoses when identifying cases, but differed in the classification of those without a diagnosis. It has been argued that symptom-based measures are preferable over their self-reported counterparts, and that studies utilising self-reported diagnoses for the purpose of case-control comparisons are more likely to identify effects that are non-specific, complicating efforts to disentangle disorder-specific factors and treatments (Cai et al, 2020;Phillips & Kendler, 2021). For studies that are unable to administer symptom-based assessments or existing studies that did not include these measures, combining multiple broad diagnostic measures (e.g., self-reported diagnoses, self-reported help-seeking questions, and self-reported antidepressant usage) has been shown to reduce misclassification and increase heritability of MDD cases to equal or exceed heritability estimates of symptom-based MDD (Glanville et al, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of symptom-based versus self-reported diagnostic measures of anxiety and depression disorders in the GLAD and COPING cohorts

Davies

Buckman

Adey

et al. 2022

Journal of Anxiety Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of symptom-based versus self-reported diagnostic measures of anxiety and depression disorders in the GLAD and COPING cohorts

Davies

Buckman

Adey

et al. 2022

Journal of Anxiety Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Comprehensive SUD phenotyping can also play a crucial role in accurate identification of treatment outcomes and requires more systematic assessment of non-EEG variables including personality, family history, demographics, polysubstance use, psychiatric/medical comorbidities, and genetic profiles. Multivariate approaches, for example “deep phenotyping” (Lahnakoski et al, 2021 ; Phillips and Kendler, 2021 ) and subtyping (Hong et al, 2018 ), are being increasingly utilized in psychiatry (Beijers et al, 2019 ) and SUD (Kinreich et al, 2021 ) research. In the same vein, we also expect greater coordination (fusion) of EEG with SUD-relevant genomic (Huggett and Stallings, 2020 ), epigenetic (Farris and Mayfield, 2021 ), cardiovascular (Eddie et al, 2022 ), gastrointestinal (Meckel and Kiraly, 2019 ), metabolic (Caspani et al, 2022 ), and exposome (Pries et al, 2022 ) variables.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of electroencephalographic (EEG) markers for tracking neurophysiological changes and predicting outcomes in substance use disorder treatment

Bel-Bahar

Khan²,

Shaik³

et al. 2022

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Substance use disorders (SUDs) constitute a growing global health crisis, yet many limitations and challenges exist in SUD treatment research, including the lack of objective brain-based markers for tracking treatment outcomes. Electroencephalography (EEG) is a neurophysiological technique for measuring brain activity, and although much is known about EEG activity in acute and chronic substance use, knowledge regarding EEG in relation to abstinence and treatment outcomes is sparse. We performed a scoping review of longitudinal and pre-post treatment EEG studies that explored putative changes in brain function associated with abstinence and/or treatment in individuals with SUD. Following PRISMA guidelines, we identified studies published between January 2000 and March 2022 from online databases. Search keywords included EEG, addictive substances (e.g., alcohol, cocaine, methamphetamine), and treatment related terms (e.g., abstinence, relapse). Selected studies used EEG at least at one time point as a predictor of abstinence or other treatment-related outcomes; or examined pre- vs. post-SUD intervention (brain stimulation, pharmacological, behavioral) EEG effects. Studies were also rated on the risk of bias and quality using validated instruments. Forty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. More consistent findings included lower oddball P3 and higher resting beta at baseline predicting negative outcomes, and abstinence-mediated longitudinal decrease in cue-elicited P3 amplitude and resting beta power. Other findings included abstinence or treatment-related changes in late positive potential (LPP) and N2 amplitudes, as well as in delta and theta power. Existing studies were heterogeneous and limited in terms of specific substances of interest, brief times for follow-ups, and inconsistent or sparse results. Encouragingly, in this limited but maturing literature, many studies demonstrated partial associations of EEG markers with abstinence, treatment outcomes, or pre-post treatment-effects. Studies were generally of good quality in terms of risk of bias. More EEG studies are warranted to better understand abstinence- or treatment-mediated neural changes or to predict SUD treatment outcomes. Future research can benefit from prospective large-sample cohorts and the use of standardized methods such as task batteries. EEG markers elucidating the temporal dynamics of changes in brain function related to abstinence and/or treatment may enable evidence-based planning for more effective and targeted treatments, potentially pre-empting relapse or minimizing negative lifespan effects of SUD.

show abstract

“…Large, multilevel data sets will enable deep phenotyping and distinguish pathophysiological pathways (Phillips & Kendler, 2021 ). For example, remote monitoring can complement symptom monitoring and capture signals more representative of the underlying pathophysiology of BD and BPD (Gillett et al, 2021 ; Gillett & Saunders, 2019 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the development of bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder in young people: a meta-review of systematic reviews

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There is ongoing debate on the nosological position of bipolar disorder (BD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD). Identifying the unique and shared risks, developmental pathways, and symptoms in emerging BD and BPD could help the field refine aetiological hypotheses and improve the prediction of the onset of these disorders. This study aimed to: (a) systematically synthesise the available evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) concerning environmental, psychosocial, biological, and clinical factors leading to the emergence of BD and BPD; (b) identify the main differences and common features between the two disorders to characterise their complex interplay and, (c) highlight remaining evidence gaps. Methods Data sources were; PubMed, PsychINFO, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, Medline, ISI Web of Science. Overlap of included SRs/MAs was assessed using the corrected covered area process. The methodological quality of each included SR and MA was assessed using the AMSTAR. Results 22 SRs and MAs involving 249 prospective studies met eligibility criteria. Results demonstrated that family history of psychopathology, affective instability, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety disorders, depression, sleep disturbances, substance abuse, psychotic symptoms, suicidality, childhood adversity and temperament were common predisposing factors across both disorders. There are also distinct factors specific to emerging BD or BPD. Conclusions Prospective studies are required to increase our understanding of the development of BD and BPD onset and their complex interplay by concurrently examining multiple measures in BD and BPD at-risk populations.

show abstract

Three Important Considerations for Studies Examining Pathophysiological Pathways in Psychiatric Illness

Cited by 9 publications

References 5 publications

Comparison of symptom-based versus self-reported diagnostic measures of anxiety and depression disorders in the GLAD and COPING cohorts

Comparison of symptom-based versus self-reported diagnostic measures of anxiety and depression disorders in the GLAD and COPING cohorts

A scoping review of electroencephalographic (EEG) markers for tracking neurophysiological changes and predicting outcomes in substance use disorder treatment

Understanding the development of bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder in young people: a meta-review of systematic reviews

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About